On Sat, Jan 4, 2014 at 3:24 AM, Peter Maydell <peter.mayd...@linaro.org> wrote: > On 3 January 2014 16:56, Peter Crosthwaite <peter.crosthwa...@xilinx.com> > wrote: >> On Sat, Jan 4, 2014 at 2:22 AM, Peter Maydell <peter.mayd...@linaro.org> >> wrote: >>> On 3 January 2014 16:15, Peter Crosthwaite <peter.crosthwa...@xilinx.com> >>> wrote: >>>> One subtle question before respinning - should the >>>> qdev_set_nic_properties actually be conditional? Setting it to an >>>> unused NIC should be harmless, so perhaps it should be outside the >>>> if(nd->used). Other boards/MAC combos that dont do the >>>> qdev_check_nic_model can then just dispose of the if (nd->used) check >>>> altogether. >>> >>> Well qdev_set_nic_properties as it stands today will unconditionally >>> assume you've passed it a valid NICInfo, so we have to a void calling >>> it if nd->used isn't set. >> >> So I guess I'm thinking that the unusued nics should be a "valid" >> NICInfo - just one that doesn't connect to anything. Currently, >> qdev_set_nic_properties() sets three props - "mac", "netdev" and >> "vectors". "mac" looks dubious to me, I'm not sure why the net layer >> is telling devices what their MAC addresses are - it should be the >> other way round. > > The device doesn't (in the old -net model) know what its MAC address > is, because that's something you specify in the -net command line option. > So this is the passing on of that info to the device. > >> Setting of "netdev" is already protected against NULL >> setting so that one is handled. "vectors" looks like it has a sanity >> check guard on its setting as well via the DEV_NVECTORS_UNSPECIFIED >> check. Although that value may rely on some net.c code paths for >> non-NULL NICs. > > I think it would probably be better to look into properly cleaning up > the legacy -net nic support and moving embedded devices over to > work with some variant of the new command line model, rather > than tweaking the legacy stuff. nd_table eventually should ideally > just go away I think. >
Ok, you've talked me out of it. Respun with the if. Regards, Peter > thanks > -- PMM >
